Hampton Bishop Parish Council, R (On the Application Of) v Herefordshire Council

Hampton Bishop Parish Council, R (On the Application Of) v Herefordshire Council

The Planning Committee lawfully treated the transfer of the Rugby Club’s existing ground and enabling housing as material considerations, properly applied and understood the relevant development plan policies, complied with section 38(6) of the 2004 Act, and had sufficient environmental information. None of the Claimant’s grounds were made out in law.

Parties
Claimant: Hampton Bishop Parish Council; Defendant: Herefordshire Council; Interested Party: Hereford Rugby Football Club; Interested Party: Bloor Homes Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 December 2013
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Substantive Judgment After Rolled Up Hearing
Outcome
Claim dismissed; permission to proceed granted but substantive application refused on all grounds.
Legal Topics
Material Considerations in Planning, Development Plan Interpretation, Section 106 Obligations, Environmental Impact Assessment, Judicial Review Procedure
Administrative Law Planning Law Material Considerations in Planning Development Plan Interpretation Section 106 Obligations Environmental Impact Assessment Judicial Review Procedure

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 22 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hampton Bishop Parish Council

Claimant

Herefordshire Council

Defendant

Hereford Rugby Football Club

Interested Party

Bloor Homes Limited

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Substantive Judgment After Rolled Up Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Planning Committee erred in law in its approach to material considerations, including the transfer of the Rugby Club’s existing ground and enabling housing
  2. 2 Whether the Planning Committee properly applied and understood the development plan and relevant policies
  3. 3 Whether the Planning Committee complied with section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004

Ratio Decidendi

The Planning Committee lawfully treated the transfer of the Rugby Club’s existing ground and enabling housing as material considerations, properly applied and understood the relevant development plan policies, complied with section 38(6) of the 2004 Act, and had sufficient environmental information. None of the Claimant’s grounds were made out in law.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed; permission to proceed granted but substantive application refused on all grounds.

Orders

  • Permission to proceed with judicial review granted.
  • Substantive application for judicial review refused on all grounds.